Ahhhhhh good clarification! Sorry for missing the location point.

It’s also generational. My dad was very confused (dare I say nonplussed?) when I used the informal meaning. IIRC he corrected me which is what led me to realize the difference. It seems to go back to at least 2013.

Wow! I learned something. To return the favor, life would be better for you if you were less rude in the way you convey information.

I don’t understand how AGPL allows Canonical to make and sell proprietary copies of this software without violating their license. That’s the only way your scenario could happen. If you’re aware of a situation where a company can do this, I’d love to learn.

Since OP is in the UK, I can pull out “nonplussed.” Current American usage of the word is a lack of surprise or general acceptance. I am nonplussed when news arrives that another politician was caught in a sex scandal. Non-American usage is complete surprise and an inability to act. The Scot was nonplussed when the drunk American vomited noisily on his shoes.

Edit: I am firmly in the “general acceptance” camp and usually have to process for a second or two when someone uses it in its traditional sense.

They would have used a license like SSPL or the newer BSL for that. AGPL keeps it open. They got that going for them and about nothing else.

No other company will contribute to LXD now. This is 100% a Canonical tool. Were the big clouds looking at deploying LXD so Canonical tried to block them?

It doesn’t get better. The rest of the series, bar the novellas, is a slog. It took me several months, around fifteen other books, and a vacation to get through the whole series.

How is the modern notion of interchangeable parts different from the ancient notion of interchangeable parts?

@Aboel3z@programming.dev do you plan on ever interacting with the community or do you post links to drive engagement? You have already deleted one post today without answering any of the interesting questions posted in the comments.

@Aboel3z@programming.dev do you plan on ever interacting with the community or do you post your links to drive Medium engagement?

The last post I commented this on has been deleted. I will say this is the first article I’ve seen that wasn’t under your normal byline; given the comparable writing style it kinda seems like it’s still your article.

IANAL. I recommend you start with the link I shared and the OP article which has a massive number of links to related cases (included the one I shared). The basics, as I understand them, is that being compelled to share a password and being compelled to give details of a crime you committed are viewed differently by the law.

It is complicated in the US because of biometrics and the wide use of contempt citations. If you “forget” your password, you can be held in contempt and jailed for up to 18 months (I missed that; last I knew it was indefinite). Biometrics and other “something you are” items can be forcibly taken (eg your fingerprints or retinal scans) with full legal backing. Your perspective, while laudable, only exists in the potential future orgs like the EFF and ACLU are fighting to create. It is very wrong today.

I am incredibly partial to Computer Modern Unicode because it’s a Unicode-capable version of the default LaTeX font. I’ve used this web port of Computer Modern for a very long time as well.

This is mostly incorrect. There are provably unsolvable problems and unsolved problems. Many times someone will mislabel the latter as the former; that doesn’t make it actually provably unsolvable. Often we suspect unsolved problems might be unsolvable but do not go to the extreme of claiming it until it’s proved impossible to solve.

Your interpretation is correct. There’s no new logic here, just new special cases of a problem whose general solution is still unknown. I think it’s pretty cool and has a lot of value in places like design theory where the getting examples to try and play around with general solution ideas is really tough. But all it did was creatively crunch numbers.

Buried the fucking lede with misleading garbage. They came up with new, larger cap sets than were previously known. That’s cool, but it doesn’t actually prove anything related to open cap set conjectures. I’d contend this is similar to the early solutions of the four-color map theorem albeit built with a computer coming up with the models to brute force. Pretty fucking neat; not solving an unsolvable problem by any stretch of the imagination. I would expect that kind of hyperbole from the lay press not the fucking MIT Review.

Edit because this shit is really cool: I intentionally linked this to the four color map theorem because that was the first brute force proof (at least via computer). Lots of people got pissed at the authors and said it was invalid because they reduced their special cases to a finite set and had a computer chug through them. imo proof by computer is valid and one of the ways stuff like this can aid math. There are so many problems in combinatorics alone that could benefit from this treatment of just getting new, unknown special cases to get to a general case or handling previously too large finite sets of special cases.

@Aboel3z@programming.dev do you plan on ever interacting with the community or do you post your links to drive Medium engagement?

Cox Enterprises isn’t some random company. It’s one of the largest privately owned companies in the US. They are somewhat capable of doing things like this.

Having experience with Cox Enterprises, it’s just a massive amalgamation of disparate acquisitions that have never been remotely brought together in a meaningful way so it is a slightly dubious claim. This would require much more coordination across entities than I feel is possible with the CMG I knew of pre-pandemic.

In all fairness to Pocket Casts, the yearly cost in the US is $40, which is about the monthly cost of the three things you mentioned together. If your country gives you yearly Google Play Pass, YouTube Premium, and Spotify Premium for less than $40 US, that’s a fucking steal.

In all fuck you to Pocket Casts, Basic App functionality like folders shouldn’t be behind a subscription. I can understand a one-time unlock fee for app functionality or ongoing subscription costs to cover cloud storage and sync capabilities. I cannot fucking understand why folders would cost me $40 US a year.